get-help

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Description only states 'Get help' without revealing what the help contains (e.g., list of commands, syntax, examples) or any behavioral traits like response format or rate limits. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden and fails to disclose behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely concise single sentence. For a zero-parameter help tool, this is appropriately sized and front-loaded. Loses 1 point for lacking any structure or additional context.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description minimally explains the tool's purpose but omits what kind of help is returned (e.g., text, URL, interactive). It is adequate but limited, especially for a help tool that might need to guide further use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100% (vacuous). According to rubric, 0 params baseline is 4. The description does not add param info but none is needed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'get' and resource 'help' and specifies the context 'using the After Effects MCP integration', making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'apply-effect' or 'create-composition' which perform specific actions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or specific scenarios where help is appropriate. The description lacks any usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.